Just think what might have happened for UConn if Susan Herbst and the AD had stayed home instead of gallivanting off to the Islands when the ACC was deciding between their school and Louisville a year ago. The L'ville key personnel stayed, lobbied hard and got in. UConn was left with years of wandering in the GO5 desert.

Too bad that Maryland will be leaving the ACC for the Big TEN. If them Terps could have stayed, the conference could add 2 more members (Louisville would be one of them, and the other would be Rutgers or UConn or Cincinnati).

I don't disagree about collecting fees as being "just business," but the way the Big East/AAC pursued the subject against departing schools, and the attitudes of those departing schools, could make the subject a bitter one. It all the depends on the school(s) being made to pay up. And a school can choose not to collect those fees. Kansas didn't take Nebraska and Colorado's money, and people interpreted the gesture as a wise move on the Jayhawks' part, one that could be interpreted as a goodwill gesture toward both schools like Texas AND the departing schools. It's just perspective, I guess.

(Did those Tarheel, Blue Devil, and Wolfpack loving bb refs conveniently let the elbowing and so forth go too far and the famous brawl happened?) How the ACC handled this afterwards was not a class in conflict resolution.

Not long afterwards, and this dang fight WAS one little factor, charter member South Carolina pulled out of the ACC. Maryland and South Carolina ended regular season competition in most everything thereafter.

How ironic, it is those two charter members South Carolina AND Maryland that have exited the ACC, though the timing is decades apart.

Once Maryland is all out of the ACC, really, Maryland and South Carolina need to schedule a celebratory bb game yearly, call it 'Out-of-the-ACC Classic'; and never let the NC4 based, 'old' ACC, divide, subdue, and deny, again.

Just think what might have happened for UConn if Susan Herbst and the AD had stayed home instead of gallivanting off to the Islands when the ACC was deciding between their school and Louisville a year ago. The L'ville key personnel stayed, lobbied hard and got in. UConn was left with years of wandering in the GO5 desert.

Westwolf - gotta be impressed with your brief statement. With what was going on, one can be certain Tom Jurich, L'ville AD, was not at the time at the women's Paradise Jam in the Virgin Islands sipping pina coladas. He was getting the job done at home, and then he could celebrate a deal with a shot or two of quality Kentucky bourbon.

On the other hand, it is said, one has to give the Nat'l Championship for Realignment at the time to Rutgers. Then, Rutgers' handling of their internal sports affairs got embarrassing. But give Rutgers some credit (or the B1G credit), they managed the 'sorta secret' well enough.

Officials that Universities hire do matter in these sorts of things. Levels of expectation and tolerance for ineptness and frolicing do vary depending on where. It can greatly impact where one's school ends up.

Rutgers tends to stand-out because some of their general lackluster athletic history and the move was to the prestigious and much more lucrative B1G. But Rutgers offered the B1G several dimensions of what was being sought (location/another eastern market/academic compatibility), and was available for the right moment for transition. Personally, I view it as a pragmatic move by the B1G, rather than pulling some shocking 'coup'.

It's the 'lateral' moves among BCS-types/power 5 conferences that have gotten shut down for now.

While the GoR's are in place, the SEC, for example, has no attractive options if they decided they wanted to expand again. The B1G is in a similar situation, but it is not going to expand almost purely on geography, with a school such as UConn; at least in the forseeable future.

The ACC on the other hand, if they wanted 16, could attempt to fit in schools such as Cincy or UConn, if ND very unlikely agreed to conference fb. The ACC has tried to pursue strength with numbers and wants to be hardnosed about anyone that tries to leave.

The PAC12 is not talked about as much, but they could expand, outside the current B12, if they were willing to compromise on the criteria of candidates. Little has been said about this, but I am sure the PAC12 has discussed this: Would it be in the interest of the PAC12 to make a greater spread in the western states and fill in the geographic gaps of coverage areas? That would mean securing a school in Nevada (Nevada at Reno or UNLV) and New Mexico (UNM). Granted, these are not grandiose choices, but they could serve a geographic purpose. To counter, one would argue the PAC12 already dominates coverage in places such as Nevada. However, depth develops and grows, and rational proximities can be a good factor. If the PAC12 really did such, later possibly adding a couple or so of B12 schools could appear less out of sort, and look even more as natural progression. Placements would be in all of the western states with the exception of Idaho, Montana, Wyoming, and Hawaii in the Pacific.

The Big12 has the greater directions to expand and the most slots to fill to equal their power5 peers. With the Big12's own GoR they don't want any more extractions, but they don't want to add anyone either, at least from outside the existing Power5. They are not in proactive mode and have embraced wait-and-see for the future. Anything they do, may ultimately be reactive, which is how the conference has responded during recent times.

To create near future shifts among the power5 conferences, the new, super-division may have to be created first. A condition for inclusion could be that each conference drops or compromise on the GoR rules. Instead, a uniform/standard policy on GoRs' could be adapted to apply to all included conferences. Certain fees and waiting periods could apply, but the obstacles to make shifts would not be insurmoutable and would be focused on actual cost projections. One or two of the current power5 conferences could end up overall weaker while others may get stronger, but none of the 5 would necessarily be forced out of existence. Extractions could be replaced by certain schools from the lower 5 or certain independents. Later, a national championship could include an expansion to 8 with at least 4 conferences assured at least one placement each. All this may be the compriomises needed to allow substantive expansion/realignment among the elite. I doubt none of them shall drop/compromise the GoRs' on their own without the greater, overall incentive.Schools such as Baylor, TCU, Wake Forest, and Syracuse, that know another power conference would probably not pick them up, could have some satisfaction that they would remain in the super-division though the composition of their conference could be subject to changes with departures and additions.

The built-in 'protection' for conferences such as the ACC and the B12 would be to have all conferences in the super-division to have a standard limit on the number of members. This could be 16, maybe 18, but certainly no more than that. This would keep, for example, the B1G and/or the SEC from devouring the ACC with five or six extractions. It would urge expansion moves to be more thoughtful and strategic, but places a clear limit to monopolizing much deeper.

SEC, Big Ten, and PAC don't feel a need for GOR's, since they will be doing the inviting, not fending off potential "poachers".

In the case of the PAC, I think their "protection" derives from geography. No other conference (rational conference - I don't include the John Marinatto-led Big East) would seemingly want to grab one or two members isolated by a 1000+ miles.

Larry Scott admitted in an interview (probably posted on the PAC thread) that after the TX-OK-PAC16 thing didn't happen, the PAC did consider expansion with some Mountain / Pacific time zone schools.... he mentioned Boise State and SDSU by name and one other (not BYU, I don't think).The group thought these were decent expansion candidates, but chose not to expand at that time, as they felt no presssure to go beyond 12 so soon, and wanted to assimilate Colorado and Utah, and get used to the 2 division format in football...

SEC, Big Ten, and PAC don't feel a need for GOR's, since they will be doing the inviting, not fending off potential "poachers".

In the case of the PAC, I think their "protection" derives from geography. No other conference (rational conference - I don't include the John Marinatto-led Big East) would seemingly want to grab one or two members isolated by a 1000+ miles.

Larry Scott admitted in an interview (probably posted on the PAC thread) that after the TX-OK-PAC16 thing didn't happen, the PAC did consider expansion with some Mountain / Pacific time zone schools.... he mentioned Boise State and SDSU by name and one other (not BYU, I don't think).The group thought these were decent expansion candidates, but chose not to expand at that time, as they felt no presssure to go beyond 12 so soon, and wanted to assimilate Colorado and Utah, and get used to the 2 division format in football...

Admittedly, I don't see it happening any time soon, but there are some fair-sized markets in the PAC-12s footprint that are "under-served".

I would not call Boise a major market, and I wonder if that shcool can sustain their FB excellence once Chris Peterson et. al. depart (I have my doubts)....

HOWEVER, I would think that if SDSU and / or UNLV elevated their athletic programs across-the-board, and became dominant programs in the MWC, they might get a look. (Las Vegas and San Digeo being major markets, as evidenced by having Ron Burgundy...).Yeah, I know SDSU is part of the CSU system instead of the UC system, and there is gambling and Tarkanian baggage associated with UNLV, but money is money.

The TV networks (FOX, ESPN) will let the PAC know if expansion into such markets would be worthwhile, or would only dilute the current 12 schools' share of the revenue...

Shouldn't the ACC plan to change their football/baseball-league division format (since it's only used for those sports, but NOT basketball nor volleyball nor soccer, hmmph!) from their current one (as of from Atlantic/Coastal to either East/West or North/South)?.

For instance. In case if that's a possibility, it should be the following:

I know that Westwolf. I was just showing as a symbolic example. But if I was Maryland, I would for sure! But back to the division format topic (putting Maryland and Rutgers aside), what are your thoughts if the ACC plans to find a 16th school (if Notre Dame could join in ACC football play from Indy status)?

what are your thoughts if the ACC plans to find a 16th school (if Notre Dame could join in ACC football play from Indy status)?

IF Notre Dame joined as a 16th, Cincinnati is the clear-cut option in my opinion. Connecticut would be the other name thrown around, but Cincinnati has more name in the football world. Connecticut is the better basketball program, but Cincinnati basketball isn't terrible. Also, getting into Ohio adds new recruiting soil (I know that Ohio St would have the obvious first picks from the state, but playing against teams like Florida St, Notre Dame, and North Carolina on a regular basis would be a draw to some players. If they went to 18 I would definitely add Connecticut then try to get West Virginia if possible. My divisions would be with 18:

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum